universal health care political cartoons

Maybe Obama Finally gets it

Obama Says U.S. Long-Term Debt Load ‘Unsustainable’

May 14 (Bloomberg) — President Barack Obama, calling current deficit spending “unsustainable,” warned of skyrocketing interest rates for consumers if the U.S. continues to finance government by borrowing from other countries.

“We can’t keep on just borrowing from China,” Obama said at a town-hall meeting in Rio Rancho, New Mexico, outside Albuquerque. “We have to pay interest on that debt, and that means we are mortgaging our children’s future with more and more debt.”

Holders of U.S. debt will eventually “get tired” of buying it, causing interest rates on everything from auto loans to home mortgages to increase, Obama said. “It will have a dampening effect on our economy.”
…………….

Us conservatives have been railing against government spending for many, many years and have been saying it is not long term sustainable and will cause huge inflation and high interest rates.

We will see if he actually does cut government costs significantly (25-50%) or is another lip service politician which says one thing and does another, like add a few trillion more in government spending for universal health insurance for the 3 or 4 million American citizens which do not have insurance for the long term.

Adding the 12 to 15 million uninsured illegal immigrants will bankrupt any government system. The other 12 to 15 million which are already eligible for government insurance (SCHIP or MEDICAID) and do not use those programs. That is 25 to 30 million of the 45 million the Single Payer Health insurance people talk about, then there are 10 million transient people (between insurance coverage) and 5 to 10 million who do not choose to buy health insurance.

HR 676 – National Universal Health Insurance – Scarily non-specific

Library of Congress site

Actual PDF

only 27 pages, no specifics, lots of generalities which create new Boards, administrators and government employees to run a universal health insurance.

Some excerpts – Bold parts which define non-US citizens are eligible

TITLE I—ELIGIBILITY AND BENEFITS
SEC. 101. ELIGIBILITY AND REGISTRATION.
(a) IN GENERAL.—All individuals residing in the
United States (including any territory of the United
States) are covered under the USNHI Program entitling
them to a universal, best quality standard of care. Each
such individual shall receive a card with a unique number
in the mail. An individual’s social security number shall
not be used for purposes of registration under this section.
(b) REGISTRATION.—Individuals and families shall
receive a United States National Health Insurance Card
in the mail, after filling out a United States National
Health Insurance application form at a health care provider.
Such application form shall be no more than 2 pages
long.
(c) PRESUMPTION.—Individuals who present themselves
for covered services from a participating provider
shall be presumed to be eligible for benefits under this Act,
but shall complete an application for benefits in order to
receive a United States National Health Insurance Card
and have payment made for such benefits.

Congress shall divide the country into regions that will get a heath care pool of money which the regional director spends as that person deems neccessary.

REGIONAL ALLOCATION.—After Congress
appropriates amounts for the annual budget for the
USNHI Program, the Director shall provide the regional
offices with an annual funding allotment to
cover the costs of each region’s expenditures.
Such allotment shall cover global budgets, reimbursements
to clinicians, and capital expenditures. Regional offices
may receive additional funds from the national
program at the discretion of the Director.

Government sets payment level to doctors, hospitals, everyone

FEE FOR SERVICE.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—The Program shall negotiate a simplified fee schedule that is fair with representatives of physicians and other
clinicians, after close consultation with the National Board
of Universal Quality and Access and regional and State directors. Initially, the current prevailing fees or reimbursement would
be the basis for the fee negotiation for all professional services covered under this Act.

Government will forbid payment outside this system, if a service is covered and the doctor thinks you need it and the government will not pay, you do not get the service.

(E) BILLING.—Under this Act physicians shall submit bills to the regional director on a simple form, or via computer. Interest shall be
paid to providers whose bills are not paid within 30 days of submission.
(F) NO BALANCE BILLING.—Licensed health care clinicians
who accept any payment from the USNHI Program may not bill any
patient for any covered service.

Funded through tax increases on top 5% of wage earners, payroll tax increase and stock & bond transactions. What the tax is not defined, but can be whatever is necessary to fund the act. That is clearly defining the costs.

Subtitle B—Funding
SEC. 211. OVERVIEW: FUNDING THE USNHI PROGRAM.
(a) IN GENERAL.—The USNHI Program is to be
funded as provided in subsections (b) and (c).
(b) ANNUAL APPROPRIATION FOR FUNDING OF
USNHI PROGRAM.—There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this Act such sums as may be necessary.
(c) INTENT.—Sums appropriated pursuant to subsection
(b) shall be paid for—
(1) by vastly reducing paperwork;
(2) by requiring a rational bulk procurement of medications;
(3) from existing sources of Federal government revenues for health care;
(4) by increasing personal income taxes on the 25 top 5 percent income earners;
(5) by instituting a modest payroll tax; and
(6) by instituting a small tax on stock and bond transactions.

Who will be on the NATIONAL BOARD OF UNIVERSAL QUALITY AND ACCESS.

(A) Health care professionals.
(B) Representatives of institutional providers of health care.
C) Representatives of health care advocacy groups.
(D) Representatives of labor unions.
(E) Citizen patient advocates.

Why are labor unions reps on this board? Others make sense.

I am terrified of this government action.

tax your company paid health benefits for universal care?

One has to love the wording of this article.

Health tax break: Sacrosanct no more

…….
The discussions are just beginning and much remains undecided. But expect at least one thing: To help pay for changes and reduce overall costs, lawmakers will consider curbing the tax benefits that employees enjoy when they get their health insurance plans through work.
……..
The health care exclusion is the federal government’s single biggest tax expenditure. In other words, Uncle Sam forgoes more potential tax revenue from this tax break than any other.
……

Not taxing something is considered a tax expenditure. You keeping your own money or benefits is considered a tax loss by the people running the government.

This is SOCIALISM. No questions about it, anything not taxed by the government is a cost to government, not you keeping what you earn.

Someone save us from our government.

Massachusetts near-universal health insurance

Massachusetts Faces Costs of Big Health Care Plan

Three years ago, Massachusetts enacted perhaps the boldest state health care experiment in American history, bringing near-universal coverage to the commonwealth with Paul Revere speed.
To make it happen, Democratic lawmakers and Gov. Mitt Romney, a Republican, made an expedient choice, deferring until another day any serious effort to control the state’s runaway health costs.
The day of reckoning has arrived. Threatened first by rapid early enrollment in its new subsidized insurance program and now by a withering economy, the state’s pioneering overhaul has entered a second, more challenging phase.
Thanks to new taxes and fees imposed last year, the health plan’s jittery finances have stabilized for the moment. But government and industry officials agree that the plan will not be sustainable over the next 5 to 10 years if they do not take significant steps to arrest the growth of health spending.
With Washington watching, the state’s leaders are again blazing new trails. Both Gov. Deval Patrick, Mr. Romney’s Democratic successor, and a high-level state commission have set out to revamp the way public and private insurers reimburse physicians and hospitals.
They want a new payment method that rewards prevention and the effective control of chronic disease, instead of the current system, which pays according to the quantity of care provided. By late spring, the commission is expected to recommend such a system to the legislature…………..

Bold for emphasis – this is code for rationing care. Is this what American’s want, reduction of the quality of care to save costs?

This is the inevitable conclusion to any government run health insurance system, rationing to save costs.

National health insurance is great in concept until you are sick and actually need treatment.

Obama mulls making vets foot bill for service injuries

Obama mulls making vets foot bill for service injuries

The Obama administration is considering making veterans use private insurance to pay for treatment of combat and service-related injuries. The plan would be an about-face on what veterans believe is a long-standing pledge to pay for health care costs that result from their military service.

But in a White House meeting Monday, veterans groups apparently failed to persuade President Obama to take the plan off the table.

Enough said, if Obama pushes this through Congress, it will prove some of the things I have read about him and his hatred of the people in the military. I try hard to not believe it but to even mention something like this is just disgusting to me. Just like it was disgusting when the Bush administration tried to ignore the problems at Walter Reed.

This could all be part of the national/universal health insurance plan since it will do away with private insurance.

Truly injured/disabled vets deserve the full financial support of the America people and government, anything short of this is not acceptable.

Why Universal Health Insurance will be reality in 2009

This is a very simple reason if people would pay attention. A union-run health care trust known as a voluntary employee benefit association, or VEBA is what it is called. Starting in 2009 the UAW will need to pay for the retiree health insurance instead of GM, Ford, Chrysler. This means the union is actually responsible for a tangible service for the union members. Since the auto industry has all but failed the companies are not putting the money aside the contract says is required.

Read about it here and here and here.

Under the 2007 contract, the Big Three and the UAW agreed to the following:
* To transfer, starting in 2010, retiree health care obligations to a Voluntary Employee Benefits Association (VEBA) run by the UAW. The automakers agreed to collectively pay $60 billion into the VEBA, after which time the UAW would have full responsibility for providing retiree health benefits. This agreement takes the cost of providing health benefits off the Big Three’s balance sheets.

The unions must have at a minimum government paid universal retiree health insurance by Jan 1, 2010 so that they can’t be held responsible for people losing their health insurance.

If GM, Ford & Chrysler can live through 2009 since the removal of this huge cost from the car production overhead costs will remove one hurdle to the chance for profitability.

The only reason that the union leaders would make any “concessions” on this topic for underfunding is if they have been assured by the democrats they will never have to fund this anyway. Obama, Pelosi & Reid are so deep into the union pockets that they will put through a universal health insurance law in 2009 so that the retired union members will not get upset when the benefits are lost. Even if the big 3 only fund half of the $60 billion, the unions will get to keep this money since they will not have to spend it on the intended purpose because the rest of the taxpayers will pay for this. I wonder which party will get campaign funds from this pot of union money.

Peter Orszag, OMB Director, let sick die to save health care

Budget Director On $3.6 Trillion Plan

From Fast Money show on 2-26-09

http://www.cnbc.com/id/29412840

Listen from 1:45 to 2:15 of this clip.

The sentiment is, The biggest health care cost is treating people within the last 6 months of their life. America does not get the increase in longevity versus the amount of money spent.

This are the people who want to take over my health care.

For the group of people who think it is OK for infanticide, I guess euthanasia is the next logic step.

Reduced health care with stimulus plan

There is part of HR1 which has not been talked about and no questions were asked of Obama in the press conference last night.

As part of the “modernization” of the health records to electronic format the federal government will be assuming the power to tell any doctor or hospital what treatments can be delivered to any patient. Seniors are going to be hit first and hardest by this plan under medicare.

Read all about it here.

Tragically, no one from either party is objecting to the health provisions slipped in without discussion. These provisions reflect the handiwork of Tom Daschle, until recently the nominee to head the Health and Human Services Department.
Senators should read these provisions and vote against them because they are dangerous to your health. (Page numbers refer to H.R. 1 EH, pdf version).
The bill’s health rules will affect “every individual in the United States” (445, 454, 479). Your medical treatments will be tracked electronically by a federal system.
…………
One new bureaucracy, the National Coordinator of Health Information Technology, will monitor treatments to make sure your doctor is doing what the federal government deems appropriate and cost effective. The goal is to reduce costs and “guide” your doctor’s decisions (442, 446)
………..
New Penalties
Hospitals and doctors that are not “meaningful users” of the new system will face penalties. “Meaningful user” isn’t defined in the bill. That will be left to the HHS secretary, who will be empowered to impose “more stringent measures of meaningful use over time” (511, 518, 540-541)
What penalties will deter your doctor from going beyond the electronically delivered protocols when your condition is atypical or you need an experimental treatment? The vagueness is intentional. In his book, Daschle proposed an appointed body with vast powers to make the “tough” decisions elected politicians won’t make.
The stimulus bill does that, and calls it the Federal Coordinating Council for Comparative Effectiveness Research (190-192). The goal, Daschle’s book explained, is to slow the development and use of new medications and technologies because they are driving up costs. He praises Europeans for being more willing to accept “hopeless diagnoses” and “forgo experimental treatments,” and he chastises Americans for expecting too much from the health-care system.

Elderly Hardest Hit
Daschle says health-care reform “will not be pain free.” Seniors should be more accepting of the conditions that come with age instead of treating them. That means the elderly will bear the brunt.
Medicare now pays for treatments deemed safe and effective. The stimulus bill would change that and apply a cost- effectiveness standard set by the Federal Council (464).

The Federal Council is modeled after a U.K. board discussed in Daschle’s book. This board approves or rejects treatments using a formula that divides the cost of the treatment by the number of years the patient is likely to benefit. Treatments for younger patients are more often approved than treatments for diseases that affect the elderly, such as osteoporosis.
In 2006, a U.K. health board decreed that elderly patients with macular degeneration had to wait until they went blind in one eye before they could get a costly new drug to save the other eye. It took almost three years of public protests before the board reversed its decision.

Hidden Provisions
If the Obama administration’s economic stimulus bill passes the Senate in its current form, seniors in the U.S. will face similar rationing. Defenders of the system say that individuals benefit in younger years and sacrifice later.
The stimulus bill will affect every part of health care, from medical and nursing education, to how patients are treated and how much hospitals get paid.
……….
The health-care industry is the largest employer in the U.S. It produces almost 17 percent of the nation’s gross domestic product. Yet the bill treats health care the way European governments do: as a cost problem instead of a growth industry. Imagine limiting growth and innovation in the electronics or auto industry during this downturn. This stimulus is dangerous to your health and the economy.
……..

This is one of the many reasons Obama wants to pass the bill fast, do not let the truth come out.

I am all for modernizing the health care industry, but I do not want the government to limit access.
The only reason EU countries can get away without paying for experimental treatments is that the US pays for all of it and after the treatment is proven good by US dollars the rest of the world gets it at a discounted rate while the US pays for all the advances in medicine to the benefit of the world both those that succeed and those that fail.

As soon as this experimental treatments are removed as options for patients and doctors medical advances will cease and humans worldwide will be worse off.

I guess for someone who believes that allowing a child to die after a failed late term abortion will have no qualms about letting elderly die early as part of the societal good since the cost benefit ratio is not correct.

octuplets, clomid , In Vintro and The View TV show

Californian woman gives birth to octuplets

My wife told me she was flipping through the TV channels and stopped on the View today so that she could see Condolesea Rice being interviewed. My wife says she did very well.

Prior to this they 5 ladies of the view discussed the Octuplets born in California recently. There was some discussion about that some women go the “Cheap” way out and use Clomid because Health Insurance does not cover In Vitro fertilization like some European contries do. Part of this discussion can be seen on the view website but what could be considered the most controversial aspect of the conversation have been cut out of the web clip.

Sheri Shepherd made a comment that you should limit the amount of follicles that can be fertilized waiting until a small amount of follicles are present prior to have them fertilized and Elisabeth Hasselbeck said that a women who goes through this process does not want to miss any opportunity to become pregnant.

Why should an insurance company or anyone (government agency) else tell a woman how many babies she can have at once. If a women has control over her own body like the pro-abortion lobby, supports and preaches due to the privacy freedom that is in the Constitution based on Roe Vs Wade. How can a liberal pro-abortion person be against a different woman choosing a different path and having lots of babies?

If a pro-abortion person says a women has control of her reproduction in one instance why is that not the case all the time.

Maybe it is hypocritical and the pro-abortion lobby is not about a women having control over her own body after all.

Is the next step that when the liberals and socialist give us national health insurance that for our own good they will limit how many children a woman can have?

Could this be by Pelosi wanted to have birth control and more abortion funding in HR1 the “stimulus plan”?